China vs EU

China vs EU
No nuke.
No foreign intervention.
Who win?

Attached: eu_china.jpg (230x173, 12.87K)

China if NATO (America) doesnt intervene, America if they intervene (EU will only contribute boypussy to the war effort nothing else)

Neither can power project enough against other so it's a stalemate.

/thread

This
Although I guess China would come on top due to its huge population and because it's better to have a single huge army instead of 27 small ones

kek how is that even a question, especially without nukes you have like what? Billions of chinks just assraping everything in their way

How do you get them to Europe exactly?

EU, they have more starts than China.

if it's a naval war to blockade and starve China of resources, the EU wins.
if it's a land-war in Eurasia, China wins.
If it's a serious commitment do both at the same time, China wins.

*stars

by land steamrolling through russia

This
12 stars > 1 big star and 4 small ones
Simple math

No foreign intervention probably means you can't invade through other countries

No wonder why amerimutt is the NO.1 in the planet.

wrong

Attached: LVK73GO.png (1984x1736, 528.59K)

It would be a stalemate because neither country can power project against the other efficiently.
In the long run China should win because they have more resources, unity and people.

chinas military has not been battle tested. doesnt matter if they have millions of soldiers if they have a ridgid command line that does poor decisions and their strategy is to pour out cannon fodder and hope someone make it. but since no one knows how they will operate its all just wild guessing.

>chinas military has not been battle tested
Korean war and a border war with India.

China is probably the most resourceful country in the world, dude.

so this is what decadency looks like huh
nothing that some wartime propaganda cant fix tho

>implying you have the choice in time of war

implying your soldiers will have great morale and won't flee the battlefield en masse

who cares who would like to fight, justdraft people and force them to fight, theywould be cannon fodder anyway

NATOshit can´t even win against Syria

kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

they are a massive importer of raw commodities. especially oil, which is necessary to wage war.

the EU couldn't stop the north of China from getting Russian oil and gas, but they could stop Middle Eastern oil and Australian coal from getting to China.

Attached: oil_exports_2015.png (1920x1056, 1.21M)

Russia or america duh

Wait a few months and find out.

They can't stop America from selling gas to China though. Especially since China is really the only customer of American crude right now.

Attached: SmartSelect_20200404-181914_Chrome.jpg (1357x2288, 750.83K)

they can't even feed themselves

Try and keep 1.2bn people well fed during a war

China because they are such a dirty people, so unsanitary and so primitive that their lack of hygiene can turn a normal virus into a global pandemic.

>latest conflict in 79 where they lost against vietnam
doubt any of them still serve today, that means they have no experience. just google it, experts dont know how PLA would function in war since they got no modern experience and their past ones are not excactly good. this can be both an advantage to them (they know everything about us we nothing about them) or disastrous (nothing works as planned to them)

1.386 billion. So closer to 1.4 billion.

Peace-time flag-waving patriotism says absolutely nothing about the defensive capabilities of a country. In fact flag-wavin patriotism is the most degenerate piece of shit humanity has ever brought up. Too easy to instrumentalize, you are only wavin flags and rambling about some wierd-ass abstract constructs without actually trying to make the country a better place. It achieves absolutely nothing outside of being a tool to control the masses and to shut down constructive criticism

That list just shows how much conflict a country experiences.
The countries outside of NATO are more likely to fight (Sweden). Countries with border conflicts (Ireland, Greece, Turkey, Ukraine).
The Benelux and Germany have no relealistic enemies, so nobody gives a fuck. While Poland fears a Russian invasion.

Would you die for Germany?

Switzerland is also outside of Nato, so they also have more to fear.

I agree its an uncertainty but if we're going by that principle then really no major power has seen a conventional war in living memory. America has fought nothing but a bunch of backwater shitholes that didn't even have significant naval or air power.

Literally the last war NATO fought was in Afghanistan and the Taliban were so effective and retaking the country that they've basically forced Washington to the negotiating table and signed a deal that will be a repeat of the Vietnam withdrawal. As in America withdraws and the Taliban eventually overrun the flailing western puppet government.

Attached: afghan.jpg (761x692, 201.66K)

I mean, the Netherlands is surrounded by Germany, France and the UK. Who is going to attack us?

Right now, there is no reason to do so

ncie mémé

Tech vs bug...Starship Troopers war

Attached: cYWI1lnHEvoVKDdlrRt2b5et3Bj.jpg (1800x1012, 118.2K)

thats when political commissar come to work come on you should know this ivan

During the former conflicts the Netherlands had (the cold war, the war against Indonesia, WW2) people just got drafted. So there was nothing to choose anyway.
Even pacifists would be send to the military for a non-combat role (such as in the supply lines). Or thrown into jail.

Further cementing US reputation as treacherous and unreliable.

China has a larger land based army and their military technology is far superior to europe, however lack of blue water capabilities would mean they would struggle to reach and threaten european shores. By land China is quite far but may end up conquering Eastern europe (provided Russia does not interfere).

He made a very good point. None here will tell you they'd die for their country in an intervention abroad that we feel it's amoral, but try to invide us and you'll see the polls change :^)

>lack of blue water capabilities
That hasn't been true for years now. China's bluewater capabilities are second only to the United States at this point.

> westoid weakling cope
lmao

t. country so afraid of the west they go bankrupt on military spendings

Tought words from a country who shits it's pants when two dudes hold hands

Your nation would be so much more prosperous if they placed less emphasis on strength, sometimes I wonder if that is the real glue that holds it together

We would realize that the true enemy is Shartistan and join together against them.

Do we just stay in Afghanistan forever then? What do you suggest we do? Letting it become an outpost and sanctuary for Al Qaeda was simply not an option in 2001.

They were effectively routed early on but fled into Pakistan. It’s an unwinnable scenario. Just leaving is the best option at this point instead of sending young men to be maimed and die for bacha bazi tribal allies who believe the same shit the Taliban do.

Give me a non-meme answer on how you would win this conflict that doesn’t involve war crimes. It can’t and shouldn’t be done.

EU, even for the simple fact that we've been active in many foreign conflicts for years and we have a decent technology
China sent a few soldiers in Africa for peacekeeping a few years ago and when they got attacked they immediately retreated all the troops plus their military technology is unreliable and underused

wrong
noone's afraid of handholding
>tf
>tp

Attached: mwah.jpg (1200x830, 110.26K)

a military is like an insurance policy. of course you'd be wealthier not paying the expensive premiums. But when the Mongols/Napoleon/Kaiser invade, it's better to have a military already.

But I think in Russia's case, and I could be wrong...that the thinking is..."We'll things are pretty shit here but AT LEAST we have a tough army, a tough leader and lots of nukes"

YES. And the right to call Americans retards. Sounds based to me.

China unfortunately, they are highly nationalistic while half the EU men are gay tranny faggots that will welcome the multiculturalism of being raped by chinese army

those things only seem ornamental cause we're living in a time of relative peace. That hasn't been the case for most of history, and it won't last forever. It's better to be prepared.

Fair enough

Attached: C98kVoeVwAQawjL.jpg (900x499, 106.6K)

But having nukes is a keypiece of our military

This poll is equivalent to going to a college campus in a deep blue state and asking whether the students would vote for Trump or Sanders. When an aggressive enemy is threatening your way of life and attempting to destroy, conquer and enslave your nation, and when times are dire, those poll numbers will be in the 90s. During peace time in a very secure country, some people won't see a reason to fight and die. The Dutch user essentially makes this point:
Somewhat of an example is how before the 9/11 attacks Bush's approval rating was around 60% and then skyrocketed to 90+% after the attacks. To blame it on nothing but decadence is shot-sighted and simplistic.

Attached: fp.jpg (820x598, 113.75K)

That's a really good question. Starting the war there in the first place was complete lunacy.